Since when has Karl Rove become a pundit? An op-ed piece published in Newsweek caused a flurry of cancelled subscriptions when it hit the stands, and a recent article called "Obama's New Vulnerability" was recently published in The Wall Street Journal.
In the WSJ article, Rove takes aim at Obama's characterizations of himself as a uniter. Citing a campaign that has largely been built around an appeal to "purple" states, Rove argues that the promotion of "a distinctly non-centrist, even proudly left-wing, agenda" "opened [Obama] to new and damaging contrasts and lines of criticism." He goes on to claim that "for Mr. Obama, words are merely a means to hide a left-leaning agenda behind the cloak of centrist rhetoric" and that "as voters see what his agenda is, his opponents can now far more effectively question his authenticity, credibility, record and fitness to be leader of the free world."
Rove's article only serves to highlight how disconnected he is from voters and how little he understands Barack Obama's appeal to those within Rove's own party. Barack Obama's support is not born from some political tactic of hiding behind a mask of centrist policies as Rove suggests. His appeal comes from a unique ability to get people to respect not only his opinions, but the place from which those opinions spring, even if those beliefs run contrary to their own. It is an ability he has demonstrated at every level of leadership from the president of the Harvard Law Review to the United States Senate.
In an op-ed piece, Harvard Law Professor Kenneth Mack, a former classmate of Senator Obama's at Harvard Law School, writes "one of my most vivid memories of the law review election process was of one student who strongly disagreed with much of Barack's politics, but still pledged his firm support behind him." It is a sentiment shared by many with whom Senator Obama has worked as a state and United States Senator as well. Take his passage of tough legislation requiring police videotaping of interrogations, as detailed by Charles Peters in The Washington Post. Most conservatives would recoil at the thought of limiting the effectiveness of police interrogations in any way, yet Senatar Obama was able to get such legislation passed by a 35-0 vote. He did so not by running to the center on the issue, as Mr. Rove suggests he did while campaigning in red states, but by first listening to all parties with a stake in such a law, and then getting them to respect his positions. Senator Obama "had a way both intellectually and in demeanor that defused skeptics" said Republican Senator Kirk Dillard. Carl Hawkinson, the retired Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee, echos Senator Dillard in a separate Washington Post article, saying "obviously, we didn't agree all the time, but he would always take suggestions when they were logical, and he was willing to listen to our point of view. And he offered his opinions in a lawyerly way...When he spoke on the floor of the Senate, he spoke out of conviction. You knew that, whether you agreed with him or disagreed with him."
The suggestion that Senator Obama is hiding behind centrist rhetoric, as advanced by Mr. Rove, is patently ridiculous. His positions have been firm and voters can visit his website to research his positions on every issue from gun control to women's rights. The reason that Senator Obama appeals to voters across the spectrum, Mr. Rove, is not because of political calculations and careful distortions of his positions, although it is understandable why you perceive things that way given the glasses through which you view our country. The reason voters flock to Senator Obama is because they trust him even when they don't agree with him. A trust that you and your style of politics have been betraying for far too long. And a trust that Senator Obama will restore once we are referring to him as President Obama.
p.s. Mr. Rove, you are a crappy dancer with no rhythm. You could learn a thing or two from our guy.
